From: owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca on behalf of Cdn-Firearms Digest [owner-cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca] Sent: Thursday, 17 May, 2001 11:43 To: cdn-firearms-digest@broadway.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Subject: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #772 Cdn-Firearms Digest Thursday, May 17 2001 Volume 03 : Number 772 In this issue: FW: Registry in works for high-risk offenders POL rejection Liberal MP email list Re: Federation of Canadian Municipalities AGM Resolution Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #771 THREAT LEADS TO CHARGES UnbeSTINKIN'lieveable!! Editor's Comment (A real Catch-22?) (no subject) House debates Herron's gun bill ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 16:17:17 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: FW: Registry in works for high-risk offenders - -----Original Message----- From: Ian P. Berg [mailto:ipberg@yahoo.com] Sent: May 16, 2001 12:30 PM To: Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1 Subject: Re: Registry in works for high-risk offenders What? You mean Alberta is ignoring Ottawa's example and will only register criminals? How novel. _______________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.ca address at http://mail.yahoo.ca ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 18:30:36 -0600 From: Kris and/or Jennifer Straub Subject: POL rejection I have been part of this news group for several years. I have always found it quite informative. I have never made a submission to the digest, as until now I have had no need to. I now require so expertise for the rest of the readers. My problem is that my wife has applied for a POL under the new laws. She has been turned down, as she "never had a Firearms Acquisition Certificate (FAC) and/or never possessed firearms." This is wrong, she was left several firearms by her predeceased grandfather. Both she and I spoke with the firearms office clerks (in Orillia Ontario) who informed us that since she was not 16 prior to 1978, she did not legally own these firearms, consequently she was required to have a FAC to possess them, and has illegally been in possession of these firearms from that point onward. Both she and I are avid hunters, why was this never an issue prior to now, why would we not be informed when the grand fathering of hunting licensees for FAC's took place? We both looked into the situation then and were informed that "only those who wish to continue to purchase firearms are required to apply for an FAC, those who don't needn't worry now". So I received my FAC and she decided against getting it because she needn't acquire more firearms, only maintain the one's she already has! Now we are faced with this! What do we do? Was she in possession of these firearms illegally for the past 23 years? On top of that the people we spoke with 'Randy' and 'Brandy', who are "not required by law" to divulge their last names, counseled my wife to have the firearms transferred to my name. I questioned the legality of this, since I believe at this point both the vendor and the purchaser are required by law to be licensed PAL or FAC holders. The response I was given was that 'special exceptions' can be made under 'extenuating circumstances'! In my mind why would I want to purchase firearms that have been illegally possessed for 23 years? Why would we want to commit this crime? We are law abiding citizens who would just like to continue our hunting tradition, why is my wife now a criminal? Are we subject to police search now that we have informed the CFO's office that my wife is in possession of illegal firearms? Please, any and all responses or suggestions are welcome. Thanks K and J Straub ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 18:32:28 -0600 From: "Paul Chicoine" <701506@ican.net> Subject: Liberal MP email list With the exception of three or so members who don't have an email address, this is the list for Liberal members. Adams.P@parl.gc.ca, Alcock.R@parl.gc.ca, Allard.C@parl.gc.ca, Anderson.D@parl.gc.ca, Assad.M@parl.gc.ca, Assadourian.S@parl.gc.ca, Augustine.J@parl.gc.ca, Bagnell.L@parl.gc.ca, Baker.G@parl.gc.ca, Bakopanos.E@parl.gc.ca, Barnes.S@parl.gc.ca, Beaumier.C@parl.gc.ca, Belair.R@parl.gc.ca, Belanger.M@parl.gc.ca, Bellemare.E@parl.gc.ca, Bennett.C@parl.gc.ca, Bertrand.R@parl.gc.ca, Bevilacqua.M@parl.gc.ca, Binet.G@parl.gc.ca, Blondin-Andrew.E@parl.gc.ca, Bonin.R@parl.gc.ca, Bonwick.P@parl.gc.ca, Boudria.D@parl.gc.ca, Bradshaw.C@parl.gc.ca, Brown.B@parl.gc.ca, Bryden.J@parl.gc.ca, Bulte.S@parl.gc.ca, Byrne.G@parl.gc.ca, Calder.M@parl.gc.ca, Cannis.J@parl.gc.ca, Caplan.E@parl.gc.ca, Carignan.J@parl.gc.ca, Carroll.A@parl.gc.ca, Castonguay.J@parl.gc.ca, Catterall.M@parl.gc.ca, Cauchon.M@parl.gc.ca, Chamberlain.B@parl.gc.ca, Charbonneau.Y@parl.gc.ca, pm@pm.gc.ca, Coderre.D@parl.gc.ca, Collenette.D@parl.gc.ca, Comuzzi.J@parl.gc.ca, Copps.S@parl.gc.ca, Cotler.I@parl.gc.ca, Cullen.R@parl.gc.ca, Cuzner.R@parl.gc.ca, DeVillers.P@parl.gc.ca, Dion.S@parl.gc.ca, Discepola.N@parl.gc.ca, Dromisky.S@parl.gc.ca, Drouin.C@parl.gc.ca, Duhamel.R@parl.gc.ca, Duplain.C@parl.gc.ca, Easter.W@parl.gc.ca, Eggleton.A@parl.gc.ca, Eyking.M@parl.gc.ca, Farrah.G@parl.gc.ca, Finlay.J@parl.gc.ca, Folco.R@parl.gc.ca, Fontana.J@parl.gc.ca, Fry.H@parl.gc.ca, Gagliano.A@parl.gc.ca, Gallaway.R@parl.gc.ca, Godfrey.J@parl.gc.ca, Goodale.R@parl.gc.ca, Graham.B@parl.gc.ca, Gray.H@parl.gc.ca, Guarnieri.A@parl.gc.ca, arb.M@parl.gc.ca, Harvard.J@parl.gc.ca, Harvey.A@parl.gc.ca, Hubbard.C@parl.gc.ca, Ianno.T@parl.gc.ca, Jackson.O@parl.gc.ca, Jennings.M@parl.gc.ca, Jordan.J@parl.gc.ca, Karetak-Lindell.N@parl.gc.ca, Karygiannis.J@parl.gc.ca, Keyes.S@parl.gc.ca, Kilger.B@parl.gc.ca, Kilgour.D@parl.gc.ca, Knutson.G@parl.gc.ca, KraftSloan.K@parl.gc.ca, Laliberte.R@parl.gc.ca, Lastewka.W@parl.gc.ca, Lavigne.R@parl.gc.ca, Leblanc.D@parl.gc.ca, Lee.D@parl.gc.ca, Leung.S@parl.gc.ca, Lincoln.C@parl.gc.ca, Longfield.J@parl.gc.ca, MacAulay.L@parl.gc.ca, Macklin.P@parl.gc.ca, Mahoney.S@parl.gc.ca, Malhi.G@parl.gc.ca, Maloney.J@parl.gc.ca, Manley.J@parl.gc.ca, Marcil.S@parl.gc.ca, Marleau.D@parl.gc.ca, Martin.P@parl.gc.ca, Matthews.B@parl.gc.ca, McCallum.J@parl.gc.ca, McCormick.L@parl.gc.ca, McGuire.J@parl.gc.ca, McKay.J@parl.gc.ca, McLellan.A@parl.gc.ca, McTeague.D@parl.gc.ca, Milliken.P@parl.gc.ca, Mills.D@parl.gc.ca, Minna.M@parl.gc.ca, Mitchell.A@parl.gc.ca, Murphy.S@parl.gc.ca, Myers.L@parl.gc.ca, Nault.R@parl.gc.ca, Neville.A@parl.gc.ca, Normand.G@parl.gc.ca, OBrien.L@parl.gc.ca, OReilly.J@parl.gc.ca, Owen.S@parl.gc.ca, Pagtakhan.R@parl.gc.ca, Paradis.D@parl.gc.ca, Parrish.C@parl.gc.ca, Patry.B@parl.gc.ca, Peric.J@parl.gc.ca, Peterson.J@parl.gc.ca, Pettigrew.P@parl.gc.ca, Phinney.B@parl.gc.ca, Pickard.J@parl.gc.ca, Pillitteri.G@parl.gc.ca, Pratt.D@parl.gc.ca, Price.D@parl.gc.ca, Proulx.M@parl.gc.ca, Provenzano.C@parl.gc.ca, Redman.K@parl.gc.ca, Reed.J@parl.gc.ca, Regan.G@parl.gc.ca, Richardson.J@parl.gc.ca, Robillard.L@parl.gc.ca, Rock.A@parl.gc.ca, Saada.J@parl.gc.ca, Savoy.A@parl.gc.ca, Scherrer.H@parl.gc.ca, Scott.A@parl.gc.ca, Serre.B@parl.gc.ca, Sgro.J@parl.gc.ca, Shepherd.A@parl.gc.ca, Speller.B@parl.gc.ca, St-Jacques.D@parl.gc.ca, St-Julien.G@parl.gc.ca, St.Denis.B@parl.gc.ca, Steckle.P@parl.gc.ca, Stewart.J@parl.gc.ca, Szabo.P@parl.gc.ca, Telegdi.A@parl.gc.ca, Thibault.R@parl.gc.ca, Thibeault.Y@parl.gc.ca, Tirabassi.T@parl.gc.ca, Tobin.B@parl.gc.ca, Tonks.A@parl.gc.ca, Torsney.P@parl.gc.ca, Ur.R-M@parl.gc.ca,Valeri.T@parl.gc.ca, Vanclief.L@parl.gc.ca, Volpe.J@parl.gc.ca, Wappel.T@parl.gc.ca, Whelan.S@parl.gc.ca, Wilfert.B@parl.gc.ca, Wood.B@parl.gc.ca, ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 20:26:01 -0600 From: "Freddo" Subject: Re: Federation of Canadian Municipalities AGM Resolution This is Port Hope, ON? Good job! We have MUCH work to do to make up for "southern Ontario" re-electing the liEberals. Canada "thanks you", southern Ontario, for shoving these bandits down our throat one more time. :-( However, this is a great "grassroots" step to the path of righteousness ! Let's keep up the good work! Fred - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Gord Gallant" Sent: Wednesday, May 16, 2001 10:57 AM Subject: Federation of Canadian Municipalities AGM Resolution > The Town of Port Hope has passed a resolution on January 30, 2001 > calling for the Federation of Canadian Municipalities to petition the > Federal Government to evaluate the costs vs. the intent of Bill C-68, > and to make the results of the inquiry public, to determine of the > Firearms Act is the most cost effective way to preserve the charter > of Canadian Society and to help the police fight crime and violence. > > > This resolution has been accepted by the Federation of Canadian > Municipalities for discussion and vote at their upcoming Annual > General Meeting to be held in Banff, May 25-28, 2001. > > Digest subscribers should take a minute and contact their elected > municipal representatives and encourage support of the resolution. > > > ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 11:42:24 -0600 From: russelles@connect.ab.ca Subject: Re: Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #771 > >Date: Wed, 16 May 2001 11:07:34 -0600 >From: "Richard A. Fritze" >Subject: Taxpayer funded disinformation > >The following is posted at: http://www.med.ualberta.ca/acicr/ > Mr. Fritze: Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Could you please provide a more exact website. If I am going to provide a reasoned response I would like to read the entire article. No flare intended. Russell ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 11:42:46 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: THREAT LEADS TO CHARGES PUBLICATION: The Ottawa Sun DATE: 2001.05.17 SECTION: News PAGE: 5 SOURCE: Ottawa Sun BYLINE: Nathalie Trepanier - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- THREAT LEADS TO CHARGES - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- Gatineau police arrested a 41-year-old paper mill employee late Tuesday, charging him with uttering death threats and unsafe storage of . A worker at the Gatineau Bowater Paper Plant told police he overheard a man on April 24 threaten to shoot a group of fellow employees. Mario Gregoire told his employers about the incident three weeks later. The company then called police. On Tuesday, police arrested the man at the plant. At his home, they found five hunting rifles. But one of the man's fellow workers say the allegations have been blown out of proportion. IN TRANSPO'S WAKE "He is a good worker who does what he has to do. I think because of the OC Transpo massacre this has been over-dramatized," said the worker who did not want to be identified. Claude St. Amour, charged with uttering death threats and unsafe storage of , appeared in Hull court yesterday. St. Amour's lawyer, Jacques Gagnon, said his client has no previous criminal record and the incident has been "misinterpreted and exaggerated." Released from custody yesterday, St. Amour is prohibited from owning any , ordered to stay away from Gregoire, and not come within 300 metres of the company. He also has to undergo a psychological assessment. His next court appearance is June 11. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 11:42:40 -0600 From: mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca (Michael Ackermann) Subject: UnbeSTINKIN'lieveable!! Fifth-Grader Handcuffed, Expelled -- for Drawing Guns Sender: owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Precedence: normal Reply-To: cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca The old Western cliché -- "Draw, pardner!" -- took on an ominous meaning in a Florida elementary classroom. A fifth-grader was taken from school in handcuffs after classmates told a teacher he had made drawings of weapons. Yes, drawings. The 11-year-old attended Oldsmar Elementary School in the St. Petersburg, Florida area. The incident occurred Wednesday, May 9, 2001. The child was not charged with a crime, but he received some disciplinary action the principal refused to discuss. School officials say he probably won't return to school for the rest of the year, and probably will be sent to another school next year. "There were some drawings that were confiscated by the teacher," principal David Schmitt said. "The children were in no danger at all. It involved no real weapons." Noted the St. Petersburg Times: "The boy was handcuffed by campus police for his safety and not because the student was violent or out of control, said school district spokesman Ron Stone." "That's normal procedure in a situation like this," Stone said. "The primary concern was to make sure we get appropriate services for the child." The boy's treatment could have been worse. Nancy Zambito, a director of school operations for the school district, noted that, depending on the severity of a particular threat, a student could be arrested or even hospitalized. She pointed out that Florida's Baker Act allows for the involuntary commitment of people who threaten or attempt to hurt others. Principal Schmitt commended the boy's classmates who turned him in after seeing his drawings, praising them for doing what, he claims, was the right thing. Schmitt, however, refused to discuss the details of why the boy's drawings were deserving of such severe punishment. "All I can tell you is it was a threat...against students," he said. "Nobody in particular, but students in general. "We just need to get it through kids' heads that there are certain things you don't say and there are certain things you don't draw," Schmitt said. (Source: St. Petersburg Times, May 11, 2001 / http://www.sptimes.com/News/051101/TampaBay/Student_removed_from_.shtml) * * * "Education interrupted..." "The only time my education was interrupted was when I was in school." -- George Bernard Shaw * * * "Good News, Bad News, Unbelievable News" writer James W. Harris is co-editor of the Liberator Online. His articles have appeared in numerous magazines and newspapers, including The Nation, Reason, The Freeman, the National Taxpayers Union's Dollars and Sense, the Atlanta Constitution, and many more. He has been a Finalist in the Mencken Awards, given by the Free Press Association for "Outstanding Journalism in Support of Liberty." ________________________________________________________ - -- M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) President, St. Mary's Shooters Association Box 3, RR 1, Sherbrooke, NS Canada B0J 3C0 902-522-2172 mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca Hope for the best, Plan for the worst ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 11:42:59 -0600 From: "Breitkreuz, Garry - Assistant 1" Subject: Editor's Comment (A real Catch-22?) PUBLICATION: The Toronto Sun DATE: 2001.05.17 SECTION: Editorial/opinion PAGE: 14 COLUMN: Letters to the editor ON MAY 10 the Sun printed an indignant "clarification" letter from David Austin of the Canadian Centre in which he says paintball guns are not real requiring licences, registration certificates and authorizations to transport. Austin has misread Bill C-15 - not difficult, because the English in that section is abominable. The bureaucrat who wrote the amendment to Criminal Code section 84(3)(d) in Bill C-15 got it horribly wrong. Austin offers the intent of the writer - but has not understood what the section actually says. As the C-15-modified section reads, a "firearm" qualifies for the exemption only if it is "proved" not to be capable of discharging a "projectile at a muzzle velocity exceeding 152.4 metres per second or at a muzzle energy exceeding 5.7 Joules." Therefore, if the "firearm" can exceed either limit, it is a real "firearm" requiring all the paperwork. Paintball guns exceed the muzzle energy limit, so they are not exempt. However, that is unimportant. The wording requires proof of a negative - where it is "proved" the firearm can't do something - and proof of a negative is impossible. David A. Tomlinson Editor's Comment (A real Catch-22?) ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 11:42:33 -0600 From: mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca (Michael Ackermann) Subject: (no subject) Doug Lorenzen wrote: " has noted that since the new and improved firearms legislation came into effect on Dec. 1 1998, across Canada, 3,000 firearms licences have been refused or revoked, 26 times more revocations than the total for the last five years of the previous system. " Below is my rebuttal to this false arguement which I have submitted repeatedly to numerous papers and medical journals over the last 6 months without a single success in getting it printed. Dear Sir, Recent reports from the Canadian Firearms Center and self congratulatory bleatings by Ms Maclellan and Ms Flumian indicate that the new Firearms Owner Licensing and Long Gun Registry is showing great promise of success because it has already resulted in the refusal or removal of several people's status as legal firearms owners. Not explicitly stated but none-the-less true is that along with these decisions comes the requirement for the person so named to hand over any firearms they own for the State to dispose of as it sees fit - usually by means of destruction. While many Canadians may believe that the pre-emptive confiscation of private property and the declaration of individual citizens (most of whom have not been shown by the State to have actually committed any crime with their firearms) as untrustworthy by their Government are positive steps to reduce crime, we as rational citizens of a democratic free society must be careful to avoid accepting the fallacy of the surrogate endpoint. The Canadian Firearms Center has cost the Canadian taxpayer hundreds of millions of dollars and this is just the beginning. It obviously has a vested interest in showing us that this is money well spent. Unfortunately for the Center (and for civil liberties in Canada as well) no government throughout history has ever been able to show that universal registration has had any effect to reduce crime. What has been shown is that registration usually leads to confiscation and destruction without compensation of millions of dollars worth of private property, and in many cases this is then followed by an escalating spiral of human rights abuses by an ever increasingly paranoid government as it tries to stem the tide of civil disobedience. Because it cannot show us that crime is being reduced by the new legislation, the Government instead uses the self-serving surrogate endpoint of removal of ownership privileges as its measure of success, all the while hiding the fact that the screening provisions they are crooning about have already existed for decades under prior Canadian Law. The conflict of interest is so glaringly obvious that I'm sure I need say no more about it. I strongly urge any of you with an interest in public safety, civil liberties, and government accountability to visit the National Firearms Association web site at http://www.nfa.ca/ , and the University of Saskatchewan web site devoted to factual firearms research at http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/HTML/research.html . Once you have had a chance to objectively view the facts rather than get your information in the form of government approved press releases, I think you will agree that Bill C-68 is probably the greatest threat to democracy in Canada that we have ever faced. As thinking beings, we should each of us have a healthy dose of skepticism and when dealing with any bureaucracy, be it government or industry, we should always look for ulterior motives. We should be able to critically analyze any opinion, editorial, press release, or policy statement we read and objectively decide on its veracity and reliability. This is what critical reasoning is all about. All I ask is that you apply the same standards of scrutiny to the Gun Control issue that you do to the other issues you examine in your day to day lives. - -- M.J. Ackermann, MD (Mike) President, St. Mary's Shooters Association Box 3, RR 1, Sherbrooke, NS Canada B0J 3C0 902-522-2172 mikeack@ns.sympatico.ca Hope for the best, Plan for the worst ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 17 May 2001 11:42:53 -0600 From: Subject: House debates Herron's gun bill PUBLICATION: The Saint John Times Globe DATE: 2001.05.16 SECTION: Canada/World PAGE: A2 SOURCE: Times Globe staff DATELINE: OTTAWA - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- House debates Herron's gun bill - ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- - ---- A private member's bill that would remove rifles and shotguns from compulsory registration was selected in a lottery yesterday for debate in the Commons. Fundy-Royal Progressive Conservative MP John Herron said his bill means farmers and hunters would no longer have to register their rifles and shotguns with the Canadian Centre, although they would still be required to obtain ownership licenses. "I am in favour of gun control, but I am not in favour of wasting an immense amount of dollars on a long gun registry that does not deter the criminal use of , and all it does is tax deer hunters, duck hunters and farmers arbitrarily," he said in an interview. Bill C-269 was introduced in the last parliament but was never selected for debate. Mr. Herron now must convince the sub-committee on private member's business to designate his bill as votable, which would mean it would be debated for three hours and then voted upon. If not, it will be debated for one hour and disappear. Gun control was approved by Parliament in 1995 and featured a big part of the 1997 election, but played less of a role in the last federal campaign. ------------------------------ End of Cdn-Firearms Digest V3 #772 ********************************** Submissions: mailto:cdn-firearms-digest@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Mailing List Commands: mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca Moderator's e-mail address: mailto:acardin33@home.com List owner: mailto:owner-cdn-firearms@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca FAQ list: http://www.magma.ca/~asd/cfd-faq1.html and http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Faq/cfd-faq1.html Web Site: http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/homepage.html FTP Site: ftp://teapot.usask.ca/pub/cdn-firearms/ CFDigest Archives: http://www.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca/~ab133/ or put the next command in an e-mail message and mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca get cdn-firearms-digest v03.n198 end (198 is the digest issue number and 03 is the volume) To unsubscribe from _all_ the lists, put the next five lines in a message and mailto:majordomo@sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca unsubscribe cdn-firearms-digest unsubscribe cdn-firearms-alert unsubscribe cdn-firearms-chat unsubscribe cdn-firearms end (To subscribe, use "subscribe" instead of "unsubscribe".) If you find this service valuable, please consider making a tax-deductible donation to the freenet we use: Saskatoon Free-Net Assoc., 1702 20th St. West, Saskatoon SK S7M OZ9 Phone: (306) 382-7070 modem lines: (306) 956-3700 and (306) 956-3701 Home page: http://www.sfn.saskatoon.sk.ca/ National Firearms Association (N.F.A.) Box 4384, Station C Calgary AB T2T 5N2 ph.: (403) 640-1110 fax: (403) 640-1144 mailto:nfainfo@nfa.ca Web site: http://www.nfa.ca/ DONATIONS GRATEFULLY ACCEPTED! Automatic, monthly donations may be made to the N.F.A. by sending postdated cheques, or your Visa/MasterCard number and expiry date, to the Membership address above, along with the amount you would like to donate: $5, $10, or another amount. Automatic donations may be cancelled at any time. N.F.A. memberships: families: $40; seniors: $25; individuals: $30; businesses: $50. Included are regular issues of the N.F.A. newsletter Point Blank, as well as magazines like "Canadian Sportsman". Add just $4.75 per person for $5,000,000 insurance! Clubs: get associate memberships for just $3 per member ($45 minimum) and members will be still eligible for $5,000,000 liability insurance for just $4.75 each! These e-mail digests are free to everyone, and are made possible by the efforts of countless volunteers. Permission is granted to copy and distribute this digest as long as it not altered in any way.